Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 58

Silverman quoted

10.11. Participating in the debate,1 in support of the Bill moved by Churchill, Mr. Sidney Silverman said:

"The real case for this increase is the quite simple one, for which we need make no apology at all, that the value of the salary is not now equal to the nature of the job. I agree with my hon. friends who said that we were living in a different kind of society from that in which we were living in 1831. Judges cannot expect to retain that degree of advantage over ordinary citizens which they enjoyed then. But it is very different from saying that the discrepancy was too great, than to say that the salary, with all the charges that have taken place since then, is adequate now.

The proof that it is not is that there is great dissatisfaction on the judicial Bench, which is a new phenomena. One must have sufficient confidence in the judges to recognise that if almost unanimously they feel aggrieved, disturbed and inadequately treated, there is probably sufficient in the grievance to justify this House in correcting it. For these reasons, I support the Bill."

1. H.C. Debates (23rd March, 1954), Vol. 525, Col. 1099.

Structure and Jurisdiction of the Higher Judiciary Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys